[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 18:48:05 +0000 (GMT) |
Hi, Ken.
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Ken Raeburn wrote:
>On Dec 12, 2005, at 04:10, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> The sort of process I envisage would work something like this:
>> (i) Mail arriving at the list goes through the (presumably already
>> installed) automatic filter (Spamassassin?).
>> (ii) Of what's left, anything from a known serious poster passes
>> through.
>> (iii) Anything which is a response to an existing article passes
>> through.
>> (iv) The rest stays in limbo for up to 24 hours; during that time, a
>> moderator may accept it or reject it;
>> (v) After 24 hours (moderator on holiday?) articles will get passed
>> through to the list.
>Is it common these days to forge approval lines in moderated groups?
>Perhaps spam articles should be actively cancelled on the nntp side,
>or posted to the nocem group, or whatever it is that's usually done
>these days, in addition to simply not letting them through the mail
>filter....
I think the spam (on bug-gun-emacs and help-gnu-emacs) is being injected
into the system mainly through the mailing list, with only little bit, if
any at all, through NNTP - The Message-Ids which don't begin with
"<mailman...." don't seem to be attached to spam at all.
>Ken
--
Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden, Alan Mackenzie, 2005/12/12
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden, Xavier Maillard, 2005/12/12
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden, Ken Raeburn, 2005/12/13
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden,
Alan Mackenzie <=
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden, Sam Steingold, 2005/12/12
Re: Let's shut down address@hidden, Stefan Monnier, 2005/12/12